I am helping the designer of a private course who is thinning a forest of pine trees with evenly spaced rows of trees. The thinning must occur because the forest is too dense and the trees are basically choking each other out. We have the ability to make several holes in this forest, and we would like them to be pro par four and pro par five holes. One obvious idea is to make holes which look very similar to this one:

http://blueribbonpines.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/hole4.JPG

http://blueribbonpines.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/45.jpg

However, I am looking for alternate ideas. Keep in mind that as opposed to the above picture in which there is only one row of trees, we will have basically a grid of these trees a thousand feet wide and several thousand feet long. Instead of just long straight holes, what are some alternate options we could try? <ul type="square">

Instead of 400-550 ft. straight, how about a hole which drives down the tunnel to an open landing area, then moves over a row or a few rows of trees and then shoots another several hundred feet? (This would require a straight shot which then tails at the end of its slight)

How about a hole which drives about 300 ft. straight to an open landing area, then doglegs 90 degrees and continues another 300 feet?

How about a hole where the tee is placed exactly in the middle so that one has the option to throw a left side lane or a right side lane?

How about stacking the downed logs on both sides 6-8 feet high and creating a *serious* tunnel effect?

Can anyone else think of some other creative ideas?
[/list]

All good suggestions, Jeff. One thing you didn't mention was a double dog-leg (i.e. drive to landing zone which doglegs 90 degrees.....then drive to second landing zone which doglegs 90 degrees :) ).

Jeff,

If the idea of the exercise is to TRULY do what is best for the trees 'collectively', then one should thin out the worse trees and keep "just enough" of the good ones to effect a healthy tree 'forest'...and the holes will then magically appear in your mind's eye. Trees first, hole are simple a resultant effect.

If the idea is to make a couple of really interesting holes BY cutting SOME of the trees down (but only partially worrying about the forest's health), then either:
1) cut (and place the holes) on the "diagonal" (not perp or pare) to the plantings or,
2) have generous landing areas.

Anytime - in such a tree configuration - you have a dogleg, the designer has to consider if "cutting the leg" is actually easier than playing it as intended. In evenly spaced trees, it certainly may be!

You're familiar with the goodness / badness (a little of both for each) of Nockamixon's old # 4 and Kisco's pin-ball #16.
In tree rows like these, a lot of times it's more penal to be "just off the fairway" than it is to be "way off". This may not be optimal. It might be better to be 'randomly lucky' (or not).

Karl

Duh, not Kisco's 16, FDR's 16 (Kisco IB on the brain...).

One improvement on the pictured hole would be the removal of three trees. One on the right and left side a little more than halfway down the fairway near the safe intended landing area. The other would be on the left side a few trees before the basket.

On early tee shot deflections where the lie ends up outside the tree line, it would allow the chance to make risk/reward skillful recovery shots farther down back onto the fairway rather than just pitch back sideways in the fairway.

The left side has an OB road about 15-20 feet from the tree line. Removing a tree a few from the basket allows the player between the OB road and tree line a safer shot to return to the fairway. Swinging a shot out over OB and around the last tree in the line risks another kick toward OB and the route is effectively blocked by tree branches at the end of the tree line.

My point is to take a look at places where removing a tree in the line may make sense to allow for challenging recovery shots. Of course, the need for that depends on the spacing of the trees in the first place. It might not be needed at all if the spacing is maybe 20-30 feet to start with.

Karl,

A tree expert went through and marked the trees which will be removed - we have very, very little input over that. But the area available and number of trees to be removed are surely going to allow many different design options. We will have neither a blank canvas to do with what we please, nor have our hands completely tied to design only holes exactly like the one above - it's surely going to be something right in between. The 'bad' trees are marked with blue dots right now so we've done some early scoping, but it will be a few months before the clearing is done and we can get in there and see what we have. In the meantime, I thought I'd get some ideas.

Some good ideas suggested already are a double dog leg pro par five, moving diagonally through the rows of trees if such a lane exists, and making sure that recovery shots are available for shots that just miss the landing area.(s)

If thinning for the health of the forest is the goal - would it be correct to assume that the plot is intended for timber harvesting purposes?

If so, I would imagine that the owner has latitude to take out the occasional "additional" tree in places where course design would benefit - as the timber value of this activity would not be detrimental to the overall exercise. This amount of latitude would be crucial to course design in such a structured tree layout.
I agree with Karl - cut first - design after.

The 'tunnel shots' are always nice to have on teh course to demonstrate accuracy.
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course_pics/2030/eb5f6dad.jpg
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course_pics/2030/4a968fef.jpg

The split fairways are a nice way to force a hyzer or anny with controlled distance.
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course_pics/2030/7839aa81.jpg
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course_pics/2030/5e10b973_m.jpg

Share some of your desires for potential holes once you've seen which trees are marked. See if they will cut a few more to allow your design to work.

ive always liked the idea of true risk reward options on holes like this, for example

a very very tight straight shot, tighter than the image you provided, straight off the tee, say 275 or so, and also a big sweeping hyzer option off to one side that is more open in the fairway, landing off to the side say 50 feet but less of a chance of the easy 2. options being, taking the very narrow fairway for your chance at the two, or your easier hyzer for the layup three. both having defined fairways and their share of danger, but varying the shots. this is in contrast to just having a split fairway where the result is the same of making the shot.

one of the best parts of designing holes in terrain like this is the fact that you can truly direct shots off the tee, there are no windows to bomb over the trees and avoid danger, and there are no outside hyzer lines to make 'local routes'. as long as you keep that in mind, you can do alot with trees like this that you cant do on normal more open courses.

i also like some holes that i have encountered in wooded areas that are a bit simpler. trees like these also allow for very sculpted fairways forcing specific shots. first, think about a fairway that is only 220 feet long, the fairway curves from right to left off the tee so that the pin isnt visible and is off to your left and guarded by trees on the right just off the green. you can throw a simple hyzer shot and park it if you hit your line, but you can never ace it with the hyzer because of the sharp line required and the guardian trees. now, if you were to throw a flex shot forehand, or a left handed flex backhand, your shot would follow the fairway left and then stable out toward the basket at the end of its flight thus giving the chance for an ace. .... now take this thought process and use it to develop longer holes with landing zones or 'S' shaped fairways, where the easy hyzer shot will get you where you want to be, but make the second shot more difficult.

im not sure if any of that made sense without diagrams, or without my specific visualizations and thought processes, but i was trying to be helpful.

also, im sure youve seen this thread. taking some of these ideas and adapting them could be real nice. especially the notion of throwing a very short placement shot, then throwing your drive, also the idea that you could have a hole with multiple fairways that branch off half way down the origional fairway. so you would tee off and either throw 300 feet then dogleg 90degrees to the left and throw 60 feet to the basket, or you could throw 250 feet then throw at an angle 80 feet towards the basket. ( i know this geometry may not work out quite right) giving both multiple options off the tee, and multiple options after the drive. in this instance i would envision that the fairway from the 250ft landing zone - to the 300ft corner landing zone, would be narrower than the angled fairway.

i know some of these ideas are very specific, but they are just examples to help get you thinking in a way you may not have.

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course_pics/2030/7839aa81.jpg

Please use this photo as an example of what NOT to do.

Too many "random" trees have been left in the "fairway" - especially the one in the path of the arrow. Too much luck is required. I prefer shots that reward my skill for hitting the line not rewarding poor shots that just happen to get through.

How close are the trees now and what will the spacing be between them after thinning?

Heres a 500 ft hole with 12 ft spacing (prior to trimming the overhead branches)

http://i394.photobucket.com/albums/pp28/peppersaltpoo/100_0144.jpg

And heres the following hole which shoots @250 ft at an angle out into a field then turns left another 150 ft.
On the 45 degree angle your spacing is @10 ft. Just left and looking directly at the basket the spacing is @8 ft. The shortest route to the open is to the right (not shown) is at 12 ft spacing but it leaves you at a point furthest from the basket.
http://i394.photobucket.com/albums/pp28/peppersaltpoo/100_0147.jpg

Of my 8 acres, 5.5 is used for disc golf, and 3.5 of that is a pine forest that was planted probably in the late 70's for the purpose of timber harvesting. Under my ownership, I do not forsee any timber harvesting, at least while I am still able to play golf. Accordingly, when I started cutting fairways, maximum use of the land was of greater importance than future timber value.

With that in mind, I did utilize some of the tree rows that existed, but I was also willing to cut across those rows diagonally to get longer holes. In the end, I don't think that this approach resulted in any significant loss of future timber value.

In your case, I agree that you should cut the trees to be culled first, then see what you have. Then perhaps, after an initial design is laid out, the owner would be willing to part with a few more trees, should that be necessary. If the trees were planted evenly spaced, you will likely still get tree tunnels by going across the parcel diagonally, which will provide the opportunity for longer holes than you would get going parallel to the property lines or the apparent tree rows. After running diagonally, you can then dogleg the fairway as has been suggested.

Also, if the parcel to be used has both wooded and open areas, you can have fairways that are partially in the woods and partially in the open, reducing the need for tree cutting.

Mike,

The cutting of the trees is something that I have no control over. It's unnecessarily derailed the intent of this thread and I'm regretting even mentioning it. Posts from Gotcha, Chuck, superberry, thezac, Discette, DrewPac, etc. have been the most valuable so far and what I was looking for when I started this thread, which is new ideas on designing holes (or what not to do) if you had a grid of evenly spaced rows of trees.

a great hole will almost speak to you the challenge it asks. having seen the challenge while standing on the tee, having met that challenge by flying thru the hole, a player should reasonably expect the rewards of success.

i'm with Discette on this one - splits fairways and fairways with trees left in the middle (presumably to increase the "challenge"?) create some of the worst holes in golf. clear those fairways out and let us fly thru them! high scores can be due to a tough course or petty randomness. the former is good stuff; the latter a waste.

What if the split fairways were wide enough? The pictures from other courses presented previously show some pretty tight fairways, maybe only 5-10 feet apart. What if the space between the rows of trees made for split fairways of some 20-30 feet wide? If you had a tee in the middle and had to choose either a left or right fairway, wouldn't that be a good hole?

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course_pics/2030/7839aa81.jpg

Please use this photo as an example of what NOT to do.

Too many "random" trees have been left in the "fairway" - especially the one in the path of the arrow. Too much luck is required. I prefer shots that reward my skill for hitting the line not rewarding poor shots that just happen to get through.



The course/hole is not finished. The middle row is meant to be there - no straight throw. The right side fairway is wide enough for my 3/4 ton truck to drive thru with the doors open. I could drive the left side with my doors shut. There is one tree in the middle of the right side, 80% down the length (that is just a stump that the arrow passes over on the right, and even if it was a tree, that blocked 1% of the fairway wouldn't be hard to avoid), and there will be a row of three trees that split the left side into two more smaller fairways (now those will be tough. But with a natural anhyzer buzzz shot or a slightly fading roc from a LHBH, the gap is there. If you can't hit the right side fairway with a variety of throws, don't bother to play. It's only 240-260' roughly. No luck is EVER required, just accuracy. Accuracy is the the ability to repeat preciseness - I think it lacks in far too many courses and crave those that do challenge it, but that's my opinion. The point is that the hole is not complete, there are 5 more trees and many low branches that will come down in spring.

the problem i personally have with holes like this is that if the right side is real wide and a great fairway, what is the draw to use the left side? now, if the left side were straight at the basket and shorter, and the right side could only get you near the basket but not 'park it' like the left, then that may be a valid argument and a good risk-reward equation. i cant tell from the image, but in general the two fairway deal has to offer some sort of risk-reward, not just simply be two ways to get there. rewarding good shots that require more skill thus more risk, as well as precision landing zones are ways go make normal or good holes, into great holes.

Looks like the tree on the right with the red mark on it where the yellow arrow bends is the one causing concern. But maybe that's the photo perspective?

but in general the two fairway deal has to offer some sort of risk-reward, not just simply be two ways to get there.


There's a place for dual routes with similar risk/reward elements but that doesn't mean there also isn't a place for dual or more routes with varying risk/reward aspects.

The left side is for those who are more comfortable as a LHBH or a RH-sidearm. It's just an option and they'll use it based on comfort. It's like me, given a anny route or a slightly more difficuly hyzer route, I'll chose hyzer most days.

There is NO tree in the right fairway, that is a 'stump' from a tree we cut.

I see it now. It's just aligned with a tree in the distance that make it look taller than a stump. ;)

Mike,

The cutting of the trees is something that I have no control over. It's unnecessarily derailed the intent of this thread and I'm regretting even mentioning it. Posts from Gotcha, Chuck, superberry, thezac, Discette, DrewPac, etc. have been the most valuable so far and what I was looking for when I started this thread, which is new ideas on designing holes (or what not to do) if you had a grid of evenly spaced rows of trees.



Well, okay. And since a portion of my land is evenly spaced rows of trees, I thought my experience with that situation would help.

Sorry to derail your thread and good luck with your project.